Striking distance keywords are queries where your site already ranks roughly at positions 11 to 20 page two of the results. They matter because the hardest part is done: the page is indexed, judged relevant, and competitive. Closing a small gap on a page that already ranks is usually less work than building a new page from nothing, which is why this list is the best starting point in most rank reports.
That holds up because ranking is not a linear staircase. Getting a brand-new page from invisible to page two means earning enough relevance and authority to enter the consideration set at all. Getting from position 14 to position 9 means winning a comparison the engine is already running between you and a handful of near-identical competitors. Different problems, wildly different effort.
The catch is that “positions 11 to 20” is a starting filter, not a to-do list. Some of those keywords are one internal link away from page one. Others are on page two because the pages above them are genuinely better resourced, and no amount of tweaking will change that. The skill is separating the two before you spend a week on the wrong one.
What counts as striking distance?
There’s no official definition, so pick one and be consistent. The common band is 11–20, because that maps to page two of a standard results page the first page of results almost nobody scrolls to. Some practitioners stretch it to 21–30 for low-competition queries, or tighten it to 11–15 when they want only the highest-probability wins.
Two things matter more than the exact numbers:
- Use a stable measurement. A position you saw once in an incognito search is not a ranking. Use tracked positions from a consistent location and device, averaged across at least a couple of check cycles. If you’re not sure what a tracked position actually represents, the keyword rank tracking guide covers why a single number is a sample rather than a fact.
- Exclude the noise cases. A keyword that swung from 8 to 17 last week isn’t striking distance it’s volatile, and you’d be optimizing against a moving target. Filter to keywords whose position has been stable in the band.
The output should be a short list you can actually work through a few dozen at most, not several hundred. If your list is enormous, tighten the band or the volume threshold rather than trying to work it all.
Which page-two keywords are actually promotable?
This is where most striking-distance work goes wrong. The filter finds keywords; judgment finds opportunities. Run each candidate through four questions before it earns a slot on your list.
Does the keyword matter to the business? Position 12 on a term nobody searches with intent to act is worth less than position 25 on a term that converts. Rank improvement is only valuable when the query is one you want traffic from.
Does the ranking page match the query’s intent? If the search results are dominated by comparison pages and yours is a how-to guide, you’re not 5 positions away you’re aimed at a different question. That’s an intent mismatch, and no on-page polish fixes it. The on-page SEO guide makes the case for settling intent before optimizing anything else.
Is the right page ranking? Sometimes a weak page ranks at 14 while a stronger page on the same topic sits unranked. That’s often a signal split, and consolidating or re-aiming is the fix — see keyword cannibalization for how to confirm it before you delete or redirect anything.
Who’s actually above you? Open the results and look. If positions 1–10 are major publishers with deep coverage, moving up is a long project. If several are thin, outdated, or only loosely on-topic, the gap is real and closeable.
Only keywords that pass all four belong on the working list.
What actually moves a page from 14 to 9?
There’s no single lever, but the interventions that plausibly help a page already ranking cluster into a few types. Here’s how they compare on effort and where each fits.
| Intervention | Effort | Best when | Watch out for |
| Rewrite title and meta description to match query intent | Low | Title doesn’t contain or reflect the actual query | Don’t stuff clarity beats repetition |
| Add internal links from strong, topically related pages | Low | Page is orphaned or thinly linked internally | Anchor text should describe the target, not repeat one phrase everywhere |
| Fill content gaps the top results all cover | Medium | Competing pages answer sub-questions yours ignores | Adding length without adding answers changes nothing |
| Restructure for direct answers and headings | Medium | Content is right but buried in prose | See snippet-friendly structure below |
| Refresh outdated facts, examples, and screenshots | Medium | Page is accurate but visibly stale | Don’t change dates without changing substance |
| Consolidate with a competing page on your site | Medium–High | Two of your pages split the query | Confirm real cannibalization first |
| Earn additional external links to the page | High | Everything on-page is done and competitors are stronger | Slowest lever; pursue only after cheaper ones |
Work top-down. The cheap interventions are cheap for a reason they’re often skipped, which means they’re often the thing that’s missing.
One structural bonus worth chasing: pages restructured to answer a question directly in the first sentence of a section become eligible for answer-box treatment if they reach page one. That’s covered in winning featured snippets, and it’s the same editing work, so it’s worth doing in the same pass.
How do you know whether it worked?
Change one page, then wait. The temptation after publishing an update is to check the ranking that afternoon, see it unchanged, and conclude the work failed. Search engines need to recrawl and reassess, and the timeline isn’t yours to set.
A workable evaluation routine:
- Log what you changed and when. Without a dated record, you can’t attribute movement to anything. One line per page is enough.
- Give it at least two full check cycles before drawing conclusions, and longer for pages that get crawled infrequently.
- Require the move to clear your noise floor. A shift from 14 to 12 may be nothing. The method for telling real movement from measurement variance is in is that ranking change real or noise apply it here rather than celebrating every wobble.
- Watch the whole page, not one keyword. A page usually ranks for many queries. Sometimes the target keyword barely moves while a dozen related terms improve that’s still a win, and you’ll miss it if you’re staring at one row.
And accept that some won’t move. A striking-distance list is a set of bets with decent odds, not a set of guarantees. Nobody can promise a specific position, because you control the page and not the ranking. What you can control is spending your effort where the odds are best.
Turning it into a repeatable routine
The value compounds when this stops being a one-off audit. A simple monthly loop: pull your tracked positions, filter to the stable 11–20 band, apply the four qualifying questions, pick the three or four best candidates, do the cheap on-page and internal-link work, log the date, and move on. Next month, check what moved and refill the list.
Three or four pages a month is deliberately small small enough that it gets done, and small enough that you can attribute results. Working fifty keywords at once produces a lot of activity and no attributable outcome.
FAQ
Is 11–20 the right range, or should I use something else? It’s a convention, not a rule, and it maps to page two. For low-competition niches, extending to 30 can surface real opportunities. For very competitive ones, tightening to 11–15 keeps the list to the most probable wins. Pick a band, apply it consistently, and change it deliberately rather than per keyword.
How long until a page-two keyword moves after I update the page? There’s no reliable number it depends on how often the page is crawled, how competitive the query is, and how substantial the change was. Plan to evaluate after at least two tracking cycles, and treat anything faster as provisional.
Should I build links to striking distance pages instead of editing them? Do the on-page and internal-link work first it’s faster, under your control, and often sufficient. External links are the slowest lever; they make sense once the cheaper work is genuinely done.
Can I just add more words to the page? No. Length isn’t the ranking factor coverage of what the searcher wants is. Compare your page against what the top results answer and add the missing answers. If nothing is missing, the gap isn’t a content gap.
What if the same keyword is stuck at 12 for months despite everything? Re-examine the assumption rather than the tactics. Usually it means an intent mismatch, a competitive set you can’t match with current resources, or the wrong page ranking all signals to reallocate effort to another candidate.
Sandamalee is a dedicated digital marketing professional and a core member of the Sotavento Medios team. I work closely with my colleagues to manage daily digital operations, ensuring that every project meets the high standards our clients expect. My focus is on maintaining the technical and editorial integrity of our diverse business portfolios, helping brands stay consistent and impactful in their online presence.
